Short notes on Latest Supreme Court judgments (Part 3)

 1) Magistrate Can Take Cognizance Of Protest Petition After Rejecting Police Final Report

The court added that even in a case where the final report of the police under Section 173 is accepted and the accused persons are discharged, the Magistrate has the power to take cognizance of the offence on a complaint or a Protest Petition on the same or similar allegations even after the acceptance of the final report. Further, a Magistrate is not debarred from taking cognizance of a complaint merely on the ground that earlier he had declined to take cognizance of the police report, the court said.

Zunaid v. State of UP.

2) HC Can Act On Section 482 Petition To Quash FIR Even If Chargesheet Has Been Filed During Its Pendency 

Abhishek v. State of Madhya Pradesh.

3) Children Of Invalid Marriages Have Right In Their Parents' Share In Hindu Joint Family Property 

The Court held that children born out of void/voidable marriages are entitled to inherit a share in the property of their deceased parents which would have been allotted to them on a notional partition of the Hindu coparcenary property. However, such children are not entitled to the properties of any coparcener other than their parents.

 Revanasiddappa vs. Mallikarjun C.A. No. 2844/2011.

https://www.lawweb.in/2023/09/supreme-court-expounds-law-relating-to.html

4) Section 323 CrPC - Power Can Be Invoked Even After Deposition/Chief Examination Of Witness.

The Supreme Court observed that the power under Section 323 CrPC may be invoked by the Magistrate even after the deposition or the examination-in-chief of a witness.

The key requirement for the invocation of the power under the Section 323 is that the learned Magistrate concerned must feel that the case is one which ought to be tried by the Court of Sessions, the bench of Justices MM Sundresh and JB Pardiwala observed.

Section 323 deals with the procedure when, after Commencement of inquiry or trial, Magistrate finds case should be committed. It reads as follows: If, in any inquiry into an offence or a trial before a Magistrate, it appears to him at any stage of the proceedings before signing judgment that the case is one which ought to be tried by the Court of Session, he shall commit it to that Court under the provisions hereinbefore contained and thereupon the provisions of Chapter XVIII shall apply to the commitment so made.The court said that it is not mandatory for the Magistrate to wait for the completion of the entire evidence of the Prosecution Witness, which is inclusive of crossexamination.

"Section 323 Cr.P.C. gives a discretion to the Court to exercise its power at any stage of the proceeding before signing judgment. It is, evident from the statute that the power under Section 323 Cr.P.C. may be invoked by the learned Magistrate at any stage of the proceeding prior to signing of the Judgment. Thus, it is a settled provision of law that the said power may be invoked even after the deposition or the examination-in-chief of a witness. The key requirement for the invocation of the power under the Section 323 is that the learned Magistrate concerned must feel that the case is one which ought to be tried by the Court of Sessions."

Archana vs State of West Bengal 

https://www.lawweb.in/2024/03/supreme-court-section-323-crpc-power.html

5) Anticipatory Bail Be Granted To Proclaimed Offender only In Exceptional & Rare Cases.

STATE OF HARYANA v. DHARAMRAJ,

6) Section 311 CrPC | Power To Recall Witness Must Be Invoked When It Is Essential For Just Decision.

Satbir Singh V. State of Haryana & Ors.

7) High Courts Cannot Refuse To Follow SC Judgment On Ground Of Review/Reference Pending Against It; In Case Of Conflicting Judgments, Follow Earlier One.

It noted “We know full well that a 5- Judge Bench in Subhash Desai v Principal Secretary, Governor of Maharashtra, 2023 SCC OnLine SC 607 has referred Nabam Rebia (supra) to a Larger Bench. However, the questions referred to the Larger Bench do not detract from the power to bring back status quo ante. That apart, it is settled that mere reference to a larger Bench does not unsettle declared law.”

UT of Ladakh v. Jammu and Kashmir National Conference.

8) Last Seen Theory Can Be Invoked Only If It Stands Proved Beyond Reasonable Doubt.

"The burden on the accused would kick in, only when the last seen theory is established. In the instant case, that itself is in doubt.", the bench comprising of Justices said while acquitting the accused in a murder case.

R Sreenivasa vs State of Karnataka - 2023 INSC 803.

9) Section 162 CrPC Does Not Prevent A Trial Court From Putting Questions To Witnesses Suo Motu To Contradict Them 

Munna Pandey vs State of Bihar- 2023 INSC 793

Print Page